<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_02_1838251</id>
	<title>Google Chrome Displaces Safari As Third In Survey</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1262460960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Azureflare writes <i>"According to a Net Applications survey, Google Chrome has <a href="http://marketshare.hitslink.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=0">replaced Apple's Safari as the number-three browser</a>.  This may be partially explained by the release of the Chrome beta on Mac and Linux, but may also be due to users jumping ship from IE.  <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9142958/Google\_s\_Chrome\_grabs\_No.\_3\_browser\_spot\_from\_Safari?taxonomyId=1">More analysis on this topic</a> can be found  at ComputerWorld. As anecdotal evidence of Google Chrome usage gaining steam, Bank of America has apparently recently added Google Chrome to their list of officially supported browsers."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Azureflare writes " According to a Net Applications survey , Google Chrome has replaced Apple 's Safari as the number-three browser .
This may be partially explained by the release of the Chrome beta on Mac and Linux , but may also be due to users jumping ship from IE .
More analysis on this topic can be found at ComputerWorld .
As anecdotal evidence of Google Chrome usage gaining steam , Bank of America has apparently recently added Google Chrome to their list of officially supported browsers .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Azureflare writes "According to a Net Applications survey, Google Chrome has replaced Apple's Safari as the number-three browser.
This may be partially explained by the release of the Chrome beta on Mac and Linux, but may also be due to users jumping ship from IE.
More analysis on this topic can be found  at ComputerWorld.
As anecdotal evidence of Google Chrome usage gaining steam, Bank of America has apparently recently added Google Chrome to their list of officially supported browsers.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625198</id>
	<title>Was waiting for Chrome on OSX until...</title>
	<author>juuri</author>
	<datestamp>1262464860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... the AD deluge started. Seriously, google, do I need to see on every one<br>of your sites your insipid little ADs pushing me to use your browser on OSX<br>now?</p><p>Congrats on having the same sort of doughbagery advertising we've come<br>to expect from Microsoft and Apple, do you feel like you really belong now?<br>That we really, really like you now?<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... the AD deluge started .
Seriously , google , do I need to see on every oneof your sites your insipid little ADs pushing me to use your browser on OSXnow ? Congrats on having the same sort of doughbagery advertising we 've cometo expect from Microsoft and Apple , do you feel like you really belong now ? That we really , really like you now ?
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>... the AD deluge started.
Seriously, google, do I need to see on every oneof your sites your insipid little ADs pushing me to use your browser on OSXnow?Congrats on having the same sort of doughbagery advertising we've cometo expect from Microsoft and Apple, do you feel like you really belong now?That we really, really like you now?
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625706</id>
	<title>And yet...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262424480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still have to start up Opera or FireFox because I have too many sites I visit that just do not work in chrome.</p><p>But yet, for a netbook, Chrome is the best choice because it uses the smallest amount of real estate for non-browser window information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still have to start up Opera or FireFox because I have too many sites I visit that just do not work in chrome.But yet , for a netbook , Chrome is the best choice because it uses the smallest amount of real estate for non-browser window information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still have to start up Opera or FireFox because I have too many sites I visit that just do not work in chrome.But yet, for a netbook, Chrome is the best choice because it uses the smallest amount of real estate for non-browser window information.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625578</id>
	<title>Net Applications</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1262423700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, Net Applications, the place whose surveys Slashdotters pick and choose to believe in depending on whose doing well in the survey.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , Net Applications , the place whose surveys Slashdotters pick and choose to believe in depending on whose doing well in the survey .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, Net Applications, the place whose surveys Slashdotters pick and choose to believe in depending on whose doing well in the survey.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625146</id>
	<title>Chrome</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262464560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has passed? <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/" title="statcounter.com">StatCounter shows</a> [statcounter.com] they already passed in August 2008, far before Chrome beta for Mac or Linux was available. However Internet Explorer still seem to have majority of marketshare with 63\% (interestingly the Net Applications site seems to use IIS..)</p><p>Interestingly other countries seem to have a totally different market shares (wiser users?):<br><a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-RU-monthly-200812-201001" title="statcounter.com">Opera is leading with 32\% in Russia</a> [statcounter.com], <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-UA-monthly-200812-201001" title="statcounter.com">with 35\% in Ukraine</a> [statcounter.com], and <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-BY-monthly-200812-201001" title="statcounter.com">44\% in Belarus</a> [statcounter.com].<br>China <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-CN-monthly-200812-201001" title="statcounter.com">saw a huge 7\% decrease from 95\%</a> [statcounter.com] in just recent two months, with Maxthon picking up the same percent and Firefox as 3rd with only 3\%. (Maxthon uses IE engine tho)</p><p>Google has huge ways to market Chrome; they can do tv/billboard ads, internet ads, include a notice on their sites (like they're doing with YouTube) and enable option to install it along with their other apps, and pay manufacturers to include Chrome with their pc's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has passed ?
StatCounter shows [ statcounter.com ] they already passed in August 2008 , far before Chrome beta for Mac or Linux was available .
However Internet Explorer still seem to have majority of marketshare with 63 \ % ( interestingly the Net Applications site seems to use IIS.. ) Interestingly other countries seem to have a totally different market shares ( wiser users ?
) : Opera is leading with 32 \ % in Russia [ statcounter.com ] , with 35 \ % in Ukraine [ statcounter.com ] , and 44 \ % in Belarus [ statcounter.com ] .China saw a huge 7 \ % decrease from 95 \ % [ statcounter.com ] in just recent two months , with Maxthon picking up the same percent and Firefox as 3rd with only 3 \ % .
( Maxthon uses IE engine tho ) Google has huge ways to market Chrome ; they can do tv/billboard ads , internet ads , include a notice on their sites ( like they 're doing with YouTube ) and enable option to install it along with their other apps , and pay manufacturers to include Chrome with their pc 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has passed?
StatCounter shows [statcounter.com] they already passed in August 2008, far before Chrome beta for Mac or Linux was available.
However Internet Explorer still seem to have majority of marketshare with 63\% (interestingly the Net Applications site seems to use IIS..)Interestingly other countries seem to have a totally different market shares (wiser users?
):Opera is leading with 32\% in Russia [statcounter.com], with 35\% in Ukraine [statcounter.com], and 44\% in Belarus [statcounter.com].China saw a huge 7\% decrease from 95\% [statcounter.com] in just recent two months, with Maxthon picking up the same percent and Firefox as 3rd with only 3\%.
(Maxthon uses IE engine tho)Google has huge ways to market Chrome; they can do tv/billboard ads, internet ads, include a notice on their sites (like they're doing with YouTube) and enable option to install it along with their other apps, and pay manufacturers to include Chrome with their pc's.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627376</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing to do with the OS X version</title>
	<author>Magic5Ball</author>
	<datestamp>1262435160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Along with Safari, I've been using Chrome since the early spring pre-betas out of interest. It didn't become fully useful until it supported Flash and printing correctly, but since this Fall, it has become the default browser on half of my Macs in place of Safari. I find that Chrome has easier keyboard bindings and more responsive tab switching than Safari, and also doesn't drag on Street View.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Along with Safari , I 've been using Chrome since the early spring pre-betas out of interest .
It did n't become fully useful until it supported Flash and printing correctly , but since this Fall , it has become the default browser on half of my Macs in place of Safari .
I find that Chrome has easier keyboard bindings and more responsive tab switching than Safari , and also does n't drag on Street View .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Along with Safari, I've been using Chrome since the early spring pre-betas out of interest.
It didn't become fully useful until it supported Flash and printing correctly, but since this Fall, it has become the default browser on half of my Macs in place of Safari.
I find that Chrome has easier keyboard bindings and more responsive tab switching than Safari, and also doesn't drag on Street View.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625394</id>
	<title>Re:Was waiting for Chrome on OSX until...</title>
	<author>Abreu</author>
	<datestamp>1262465940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google is (and has always been) an advertisement company.</p><p>You are expected to live with it, or circumvent it (it's not that hard)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google is ( and has always been ) an advertisement company.You are expected to live with it , or circumvent it ( it 's not that hard )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google is (and has always been) an advertisement company.You are expected to live with it, or circumvent it (it's not that hard)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628024</id>
	<title>Re:I remember</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1262440020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I remember when Chrome first came out it got panned</p></div></blockquote><p>
Really? Where?</p><blockquote><div><p>And yet, here's Chrome, moving into the number 3 spot.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Are you surprised. Anyone can get more users by using their online ad monopoly like that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember when Chrome first came out it got panned Really ?
Where ? And yet , here 's Chrome , moving into the number 3 spot .
Are you surprised .
Anyone can get more users by using their online ad monopoly like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember when Chrome first came out it got panned
Really?
Where?And yet, here's Chrome, moving into the number 3 spot.
Are you surprised.
Anyone can get more users by using their online ad monopoly like that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30635352</id>
	<title>Re:Getting off the train to crazytown</title>
	<author>eyore15</author>
	<datestamp>1262521080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I see the same thing in education.  My school system bought into Apple very heavily years ago, and now can't get out.  Our servers our Apple.  Most teachers use iMac laptops.  However, need to teach business classes -- need a PC.  Want to run the district accounting software?  Need a PC.  Now, need those PCs to play nice with the servers?  That's a problem.  My state just received word of a 3.5\% reduction in state funding.  But will we go to a FOSS server?  Nope.  Will we leave MS Office behind (along with its horrible fees) in favor of Open Office?  Nope.  Will we continue to manage our own email system when Google gives management away for free to education?  Of course not.  It's Baby Duck Syndrome (BDS); implant on the first thing you see.  Without education's slavish attachment to Apple, I'm not sure where they would be either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I see the same thing in education .
My school system bought into Apple very heavily years ago , and now ca n't get out .
Our servers our Apple .
Most teachers use iMac laptops .
However , need to teach business classes -- need a PC .
Want to run the district accounting software ?
Need a PC .
Now , need those PCs to play nice with the servers ?
That 's a problem .
My state just received word of a 3.5 \ % reduction in state funding .
But will we go to a FOSS server ?
Nope. Will we leave MS Office behind ( along with its horrible fees ) in favor of Open Office ?
Nope. Will we continue to manage our own email system when Google gives management away for free to education ?
Of course not .
It 's Baby Duck Syndrome ( BDS ) ; implant on the first thing you see .
Without education 's slavish attachment to Apple , I 'm not sure where they would be either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see the same thing in education.
My school system bought into Apple very heavily years ago, and now can't get out.
Our servers our Apple.
Most teachers use iMac laptops.
However, need to teach business classes -- need a PC.
Want to run the district accounting software?
Need a PC.
Now, need those PCs to play nice with the servers?
That's a problem.
My state just received word of a 3.5\% reduction in state funding.
But will we go to a FOSS server?
Nope.  Will we leave MS Office behind (along with its horrible fees) in favor of Open Office?
Nope.  Will we continue to manage our own email system when Google gives management away for free to education?
Of course not.
It's Baby Duck Syndrome (BDS); implant on the first thing you see.
Without education's slavish attachment to Apple, I'm not sure where they would be either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628620</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing to do with the OS X version</title>
	<author>\_|()|\|</author>
	<datestamp>1262446440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As an Mac user who's tried out the OS X version of Chrome, I can assure you that no one is abandoning Safari for it.</p></div></blockquote><p>I have indeed all but abandoned Safari in favor of Chrome, warts and all.
While Safari does well in synthetic benchmarks, it chews up memory and slows to a beach-ball inducing crawl.
Firefox is slightly better, but suffers from essentially the same problem.</p><p>Chrome's process-per-tab model, on the other hand, really seems to work as promised.
I've been using it on three computers since the beta came out, and it is unquestionably more responsive.
Multiple windows, with multiple tabs each, open for days, and I can switch to any of them with no appreciable delay (let alone beach balls!).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As an Mac user who 's tried out the OS X version of Chrome , I can assure you that no one is abandoning Safari for it.I have indeed all but abandoned Safari in favor of Chrome , warts and all .
While Safari does well in synthetic benchmarks , it chews up memory and slows to a beach-ball inducing crawl .
Firefox is slightly better , but suffers from essentially the same problem.Chrome 's process-per-tab model , on the other hand , really seems to work as promised .
I 've been using it on three computers since the beta came out , and it is unquestionably more responsive .
Multiple windows , with multiple tabs each , open for days , and I can switch to any of them with no appreciable delay ( let alone beach balls !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an Mac user who's tried out the OS X version of Chrome, I can assure you that no one is abandoning Safari for it.I have indeed all but abandoned Safari in favor of Chrome, warts and all.
While Safari does well in synthetic benchmarks, it chews up memory and slows to a beach-ball inducing crawl.
Firefox is slightly better, but suffers from essentially the same problem.Chrome's process-per-tab model, on the other hand, really seems to work as promised.
I've been using it on three computers since the beta came out, and it is unquestionably more responsive.
Multiple windows, with multiple tabs each, open for days, and I can switch to any of them with no appreciable delay (let alone beach balls!
).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626712</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome on Ubuntu</title>
	<author>Duncan J Murray</author>
	<datestamp>1262430660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Go to Options &gt; Personal Stuff and change appearance to GTK+ theme.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Go to Options &gt; Personal Stuff and change appearance to GTK + theme .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go to Options &gt; Personal Stuff and change appearance to GTK+ theme.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626848</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262431860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course, you mean August 2009. Chrome didn't launch until September 2008.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , you mean August 2009 .
Chrome did n't launch until September 2008 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, you mean August 2009.
Chrome didn't launch until September 2008.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625694</id>
	<title>Re:Jumping ship from IE?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262424420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As I read this comment, Firefox crashed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As I read this comment , Firefox crashed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I read this comment, Firefox crashed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627262</id>
	<title>Re:Jumping ship from IE?</title>
	<author>The J Kid</author>
	<datestamp>1262434440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.</i></p><p>That's not the point. (also, there are Chrome billboards everywhere here in the city) This is the point:</p><p><i> Bank of America has apparently recently added Google Chrome to their list of officially supported browsers.</i></p><p>I called this! On Slashdot!</p><blockquote><div><p> <i>Also, you can phone up your bank, if their site's not working for you and scream:<br>"WHAT DO YOU MEAN, YOU DON'T SUPPORT GOOGLE?"<br>and they'll get with the Google.</i></p></div> </blockquote><p><a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1297211&amp;cid=28635463" title="slashdot.org">(In a Chrome OS topic, but still)</a> [slashdot.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.That 's not the point .
( also , there are Chrome billboards everywhere here in the city ) This is the point : Bank of America has apparently recently added Google Chrome to their list of officially supported browsers.I called this !
On Slashdot !
Also , you can phone up your bank , if their site 's not working for you and scream : " WHAT DO YOU MEAN , YOU DO N'T SUPPORT GOOGLE ?
" and they 'll get with the Google .
( In a Chrome OS topic , but still ) [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.That's not the point.
(also, there are Chrome billboards everywhere here in the city) This is the point: Bank of America has apparently recently added Google Chrome to their list of officially supported browsers.I called this!
On Slashdot!
Also, you can phone up your bank, if their site's not working for you and scream:"WHAT DO YOU MEAN, YOU DON'T SUPPORT GOOGLE?
"and they'll get with the Google.
(In a Chrome OS topic, but still) [slashdot.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30631640</id>
	<title>Re:Worthless</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1262533980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>And you will never have a non-"flawed" methodology for capturing this information</p></div></blockquote><p>
So if you don't have a working methodology, just pick a random one? How is false data better than no data?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And you will never have a non- " flawed " methodology for capturing this information So if you do n't have a working methodology , just pick a random one ?
How is false data better than no data ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And you will never have a non-"flawed" methodology for capturing this information
So if you don't have a working methodology, just pick a random one?
How is false data better than no data?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626670</id>
	<title>Jumping ship from IE? Not exactly...</title>
	<author>DesScorp</author>
	<datestamp>1262430480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"<b>but may also be due to users jumping ship from IE.</b>"</p><p>Some of us jumped ship from Firefox. It's served us well these past few years, but since 3 came out, it's been increasingly buggy and memory hoggish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" but may also be due to users jumping ship from IE .
" Some of us jumped ship from Firefox .
It 's served us well these past few years , but since 3 came out , it 's been increasingly buggy and memory hoggish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"but may also be due to users jumping ship from IE.
"Some of us jumped ship from Firefox.
It's served us well these past few years, but since 3 came out, it's been increasingly buggy and memory hoggish.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626380</id>
	<title>3rd place</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262428740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's because Apple owns Safari...</p><p>and Google is a PC.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>*jingle*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's because Apple owns Safari...and Google is a PC .
: ) * jingle *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's because Apple owns Safari...and Google is a PC.
:)*jingle*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144</id>
	<title>Getting off the train to crazytown</title>
	<author>symbolset</author>
	<datestamp>1262464560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The persistence of IE6 is due to organizations standardizing on the MS suite from the server to the browser and building their business intellingence into that web platform.  They embraced and were trapped by the consequences of that decision, after which getting themselves out of that trap involved huge expense and much opportunity cost as well as much lost face.  Bearing the scars of that experience, its not surprising that they are wary of re-entering the same trap twice.  They appear to be deciding that "standards are good".  See?  Are childrens can has learnings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The persistence of IE6 is due to organizations standardizing on the MS suite from the server to the browser and building their business intellingence into that web platform .
They embraced and were trapped by the consequences of that decision , after which getting themselves out of that trap involved huge expense and much opportunity cost as well as much lost face .
Bearing the scars of that experience , its not surprising that they are wary of re-entering the same trap twice .
They appear to be deciding that " standards are good " .
See ? Are childrens can has learnings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The persistence of IE6 is due to organizations standardizing on the MS suite from the server to the browser and building their business intellingence into that web platform.
They embraced and were trapped by the consequences of that decision, after which getting themselves out of that trap involved huge expense and much opportunity cost as well as much lost face.
Bearing the scars of that experience, its not surprising that they are wary of re-entering the same trap twice.
They appear to be deciding that "standards are good".
See?  Are childrens can has learnings.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629154</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing to do with the OS X version</title>
	<author>gyrogeerloose</author>
	<datestamp>1262452080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As an Mac user who's tried out the OS X version of Chrome, I can assure you that no one is abandoning Safari for it.</p></div><p>Okay, looks like I was wrong then, there are at last a few people who hate Safari enough to put up with the quirks in the current version of Chrome. I will have to use it more, I guess, and see what I'm missing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As an Mac user who 's tried out the OS X version of Chrome , I can assure you that no one is abandoning Safari for it.Okay , looks like I was wrong then , there are at last a few people who hate Safari enough to put up with the quirks in the current version of Chrome .
I will have to use it more , I guess , and see what I 'm missing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an Mac user who's tried out the OS X version of Chrome, I can assure you that no one is abandoning Safari for it.Okay, looks like I was wrong then, there are at last a few people who hate Safari enough to put up with the quirks in the current version of Chrome.
I will have to use it more, I guess, and see what I'm missing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629212</id>
	<title>Re:And yet...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262452860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Care to elaborate on that?  Can you give some examples of websites that don't work on Chrome?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Care to elaborate on that ?
Can you give some examples of websites that do n't work on Chrome ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Care to elaborate on that?
Can you give some examples of websites that don't work on Chrome?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625464</id>
	<title>Android  Chrome</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262423040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Android (including the Droid) has a WebKit-based browser, but it's not Chrome, and it's got its own distinct user-agent string.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Android ( including the Droid ) has a WebKit-based browser , but it 's not Chrome , and it 's got its own distinct user-agent string .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Android (including the Droid) has a WebKit-based browser, but it's not Chrome, and it's got its own distinct user-agent string.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625246</id>
	<title>IE 5.5 forever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262465040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know about everyone else, but Internet Explorer 5.5 is working pretty well here on my Windows NT 4 machines. IE5.5 has the fastest ECMAscript execution, is reasonably easy to program for, and works on all of our 2000 and NT 4 desktops. Until the other browsers start supporting legacy Windows systems, IE5.5/6 will always have a place.</p><p>Time to go back to coding the web-based CSM in C with a COBOL backend on Fujitsu Cobol<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET...</p><p>Anonymous Sig 2.0:<br><b>MADONNA IS AMAZING!</b> <a href="http://www.madonna.com/" title="madonna.com" rel="nofollow">I LOVE MADONNA - EROTICA.MP16!</a> [madonna.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about everyone else , but Internet Explorer 5.5 is working pretty well here on my Windows NT 4 machines .
IE5.5 has the fastest ECMAscript execution , is reasonably easy to program for , and works on all of our 2000 and NT 4 desktops .
Until the other browsers start supporting legacy Windows systems , IE5.5/6 will always have a place.Time to go back to coding the web-based CSM in C with a COBOL backend on Fujitsu Cobol .NET...Anonymous Sig 2.0 : MADONNA IS AMAZING !
I LOVE MADONNA - EROTICA.MP16 !
[ madonna.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about everyone else, but Internet Explorer 5.5 is working pretty well here on my Windows NT 4 machines.
IE5.5 has the fastest ECMAscript execution, is reasonably easy to program for, and works on all of our 2000 and NT 4 desktops.
Until the other browsers start supporting legacy Windows systems, IE5.5/6 will always have a place.Time to go back to coding the web-based CSM in C with a COBOL backend on Fujitsu Cobol .NET...Anonymous Sig 2.0:MADONNA IS AMAZING!
I LOVE MADONNA - EROTICA.MP16!
[madonna.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625680</id>
	<title>Re:Worthless</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1262424360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>This means that the only OS and browser numbers being tracked are those from users who specifically visit those member sites, which include the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, and InformationWeek.  If specific demographics of users--like, say, Linux users--don't tend to read those types of sites, they are going to be underrepresented,</i> </p><p>The Moz Foundation is a Net Applications client.</p><p>Opera. Nokia. Adobe. Apple. Microsoft. RIM. D&amp;B. CNN. Roche. Amazon.</p><p>The geek who hasn't ventured out of his grandma's basement in the last decade might be overlooked.</p><p>But the odds seem very good that you will be counted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This means that the only OS and browser numbers being tracked are those from users who specifically visit those member sites , which include the New York Times , the Wall Street Journal , Forbes , and InformationWeek .
If specific demographics of users--like , say , Linux users--do n't tend to read those types of sites , they are going to be underrepresented , The Moz Foundation is a Net Applications client.Opera .
Nokia. Adobe .
Apple. Microsoft .
RIM. D&amp;B .
CNN. Roche .
Amazon.The geek who has n't ventured out of his grandma 's basement in the last decade might be overlooked.But the odds seem very good that you will be counted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This means that the only OS and browser numbers being tracked are those from users who specifically visit those member sites, which include the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, and InformationWeek.
If specific demographics of users--like, say, Linux users--don't tend to read those types of sites, they are going to be underrepresented, The Moz Foundation is a Net Applications client.Opera.
Nokia. Adobe.
Apple. Microsoft.
RIM. D&amp;B.
CNN. Roche.
Amazon.The geek who hasn't ventured out of his grandma's basement in the last decade might be overlooked.But the odds seem very good that you will be counted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538</id>
	<title>Chrome on Ubuntu</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262423520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm giving Chrome a whirl on Ubuntu.  The install was simple using GDebi, the performance is great and flash, java, divx, wmp, quicktime, and realplayer plugins are working, I've got AdBlock, LastPass, and SmoothScroll extensions installed.  What's not to like (other than a current lack of an official ubuntu theme)?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm giving Chrome a whirl on Ubuntu .
The install was simple using GDebi , the performance is great and flash , java , divx , wmp , quicktime , and realplayer plugins are working , I 've got AdBlock , LastPass , and SmoothScroll extensions installed .
What 's not to like ( other than a current lack of an official ubuntu theme ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm giving Chrome a whirl on Ubuntu.
The install was simple using GDebi, the performance is great and flash, java, divx, wmp, quicktime, and realplayer plugins are working, I've got AdBlock, LastPass, and SmoothScroll extensions installed.
What's not to like (other than a current lack of an official ubuntu theme)?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627400</id>
	<title>Yep,</title>
	<author>Stan92057</author>
	<datestamp>1262435400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yep,and it was my download that did it too.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep,and it was my download that did it too .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep,and it was my download that did it too.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627236</id>
	<title>U.S. Navy and I.E. 6</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262434320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The U.S. Navy is still stuck on I.E. 6, even though I.E. 7 and 8 are approved applications. The problem is NMCI (Navy Marine Corps Intranet) operated by EDS (HP) can't figure out how distribute the application and lock out the things they want to. They have effectively rendered security of Navy IT systems ineffectual.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The U.S. Navy is still stuck on I.E .
6 , even though I.E .
7 and 8 are approved applications .
The problem is NMCI ( Navy Marine Corps Intranet ) operated by EDS ( HP ) ca n't figure out how distribute the application and lock out the things they want to .
They have effectively rendered security of Navy IT systems ineffectual .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The U.S. Navy is still stuck on I.E.
6, even though I.E.
7 and 8 are approved applications.
The problem is NMCI (Navy Marine Corps Intranet) operated by EDS (HP) can't figure out how distribute the application and lock out the things they want to.
They have effectively rendered security of Navy IT systems ineffectual.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625328</id>
	<title>Re:Getting off the train to crazytown</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262465580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>getting themselves out of that trap</p></div><p>People are still IN the trap. It's vendor lock-in at its finest. They start with MS from client to server, and everything is dependent on other MS products. Then they seal it when they have to start making MS-based web apps and such. And on top of that, they see no reason to get out. There aren't any 'consequences' for some people. So they just stay in the MS-hole.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>getting themselves out of that trapPeople are still IN the trap .
It 's vendor lock-in at its finest .
They start with MS from client to server , and everything is dependent on other MS products .
Then they seal it when they have to start making MS-based web apps and such .
And on top of that , they see no reason to get out .
There are n't any 'consequences ' for some people .
So they just stay in the MS-hole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>getting themselves out of that trapPeople are still IN the trap.
It's vendor lock-in at its finest.
They start with MS from client to server, and everything is dependent on other MS products.
Then they seal it when they have to start making MS-based web apps and such.
And on top of that, they see no reason to get out.
There aren't any 'consequences' for some people.
So they just stay in the MS-hole.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629040</id>
	<title>Re:And yet...</title>
	<author>The End Of Days</author>
	<datestamp>1262450640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or pretty much any browser in full screen mode, which kills off damn near all the chrome.  I know that extra keystroke would probably cause someone to have a conniption, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or pretty much any browser in full screen mode , which kills off damn near all the chrome .
I know that extra keystroke would probably cause someone to have a conniption , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or pretty much any browser in full screen mode, which kills off damn near all the chrome.
I know that extra keystroke would probably cause someone to have a conniption, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627404</id>
	<title>Incidentally...</title>
	<author>BigBadBus</author>
	<datestamp>1262435400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...<a href="http://www.paullee.com/computers" title="paullee.com">I updated my own stats a week ago</a> [paullee.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>...I updated my own stats a week ago [ paullee.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...I updated my own stats a week ago [paullee.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30635580</id>
	<title>Read the Terms of Service lately?</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1262522520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not even Microsoft has said you're not allowed to disable their software updates, and IT departments all over the world run their own update schedules and policies. Meanwhile when Apple started including unrelated software in THEIR software updates, people went haywire, but Apple's software updates can be turned off or merely deferred. You can't turn off Google Update, not in the software, and not in their Terms of Service. I wonder what happens when Google starts trying to enforce this:</p><blockquote><div><p>11. Software updates</p><p>11.1 The Software which you use may automatically download and install updates from time to time from Google. These updates are designed to improve, enhance and further develop the Services and may take the form of bug fixes, enhanced functions, new software modules and completely new versions. You agree to receive such updates (and permit Google to deliver these to you) as part of your use of the Services.</p></div></blockquote><p>Since Chrome is Webkit-based, it's basically Safari in an ugly new skin. I'm sticking with Firefox and Safari.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not even Microsoft has said you 're not allowed to disable their software updates , and IT departments all over the world run their own update schedules and policies .
Meanwhile when Apple started including unrelated software in THEIR software updates , people went haywire , but Apple 's software updates can be turned off or merely deferred .
You ca n't turn off Google Update , not in the software , and not in their Terms of Service .
I wonder what happens when Google starts trying to enforce this : 11 .
Software updates11.1 The Software which you use may automatically download and install updates from time to time from Google .
These updates are designed to improve , enhance and further develop the Services and may take the form of bug fixes , enhanced functions , new software modules and completely new versions .
You agree to receive such updates ( and permit Google to deliver these to you ) as part of your use of the Services.Since Chrome is Webkit-based , it 's basically Safari in an ugly new skin .
I 'm sticking with Firefox and Safari .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not even Microsoft has said you're not allowed to disable their software updates, and IT departments all over the world run their own update schedules and policies.
Meanwhile when Apple started including unrelated software in THEIR software updates, people went haywire, but Apple's software updates can be turned off or merely deferred.
You can't turn off Google Update, not in the software, and not in their Terms of Service.
I wonder what happens when Google starts trying to enforce this:11.
Software updates11.1 The Software which you use may automatically download and install updates from time to time from Google.
These updates are designed to improve, enhance and further develop the Services and may take the form of bug fixes, enhanced functions, new software modules and completely new versions.
You agree to receive such updates (and permit Google to deliver these to you) as part of your use of the Services.Since Chrome is Webkit-based, it's basically Safari in an ugly new skin.
I'm sticking with Firefox and Safari.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626262</id>
	<title>Re:Worthless</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262428080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chrome is doing better all over the place, even regular non-tech office users are picking it for their own reasons. Safari is complete crap on windows, it isn't available on Linux/BSD, just on Apple. Guess what? Even they choose alternatives to what is pre-installed. Whether Chrome joins the big four remains to be seen, but judging from what I've seen in the beta releases, all browsers will be looking over their shoulders, Chrome is a welcome addition to the HTTP client list, anyone saying otherwise is a zealot scared of competition to whatever they're using.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chrome is doing better all over the place , even regular non-tech office users are picking it for their own reasons .
Safari is complete crap on windows , it is n't available on Linux/BSD , just on Apple .
Guess what ?
Even they choose alternatives to what is pre-installed .
Whether Chrome joins the big four remains to be seen , but judging from what I 've seen in the beta releases , all browsers will be looking over their shoulders , Chrome is a welcome addition to the HTTP client list , anyone saying otherwise is a zealot scared of competition to whatever they 're using .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chrome is doing better all over the place, even regular non-tech office users are picking it for their own reasons.
Safari is complete crap on windows, it isn't available on Linux/BSD, just on Apple.
Guess what?
Even they choose alternatives to what is pre-installed.
Whether Chrome joins the big four remains to be seen, but judging from what I've seen in the beta releases, all browsers will be looking over their shoulders, Chrome is a welcome addition to the HTTP client list, anyone saying otherwise is a zealot scared of competition to whatever they're using.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626562</id>
	<title>I won't be using Chrome until ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262429880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>they ship a Mac version that runs on PowerPC<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</htmltext>
<tokenext>they ship a Mac version that runs on PowerPC . .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they ship a Mac version that runs on PowerPC ..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625944</id>
	<title>I remember</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262426100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>According to a Net Applications survey, Google Chrome has replaced Apple's Safari as the number-three browser.</i>

</p><p>I remember when Chrome first came out it got panned, much like Google's phone is today and I'm sure will happen to their netbook when it arrives.  And yet, here's Chrome, moving into the number 3 spot.

</p><p>Maybe the initial release isn't so earth shattering, but over time they get more and more useful.  It's like Google makes technology blank slates and lets users shape the functionality.

</p><p>Personally, I think that's a brilliant business model.  If one or two don't work out, no big deal as long as they didn't put too much money into it.  Refreshingly different from how Microsoft operates.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to a Net Applications survey , Google Chrome has replaced Apple 's Safari as the number-three browser .
I remember when Chrome first came out it got panned , much like Google 's phone is today and I 'm sure will happen to their netbook when it arrives .
And yet , here 's Chrome , moving into the number 3 spot .
Maybe the initial release is n't so earth shattering , but over time they get more and more useful .
It 's like Google makes technology blank slates and lets users shape the functionality .
Personally , I think that 's a brilliant business model .
If one or two do n't work out , no big deal as long as they did n't put too much money into it .
Refreshingly different from how Microsoft operates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> According to a Net Applications survey, Google Chrome has replaced Apple's Safari as the number-three browser.
I remember when Chrome first came out it got panned, much like Google's phone is today and I'm sure will happen to their netbook when it arrives.
And yet, here's Chrome, moving into the number 3 spot.
Maybe the initial release isn't so earth shattering, but over time they get more and more useful.
It's like Google makes technology blank slates and lets users shape the functionality.
Personally, I think that's a brilliant business model.
If one or two don't work out, no big deal as long as they didn't put too much money into it.
Refreshingly different from how Microsoft operates.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625406</id>
	<title>Re:Getting off the train to crazytown</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262422860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> See?  Are childrens can has learnings.</p></div><p>Cheezeburger, too.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>See ?
Are childrens can has learnings.Cheezeburger , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> See?
Are childrens can has learnings.Cheezeburger, too.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625720</id>
	<title>Re:Jumping ship from IE?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262424540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand you. Is there some kind of doctrine that says "everything is crap except for what I use"? Can you not decide to use something that fits your purposes without smearing the alternatives?</p><p>Chrome's address bar and bookmarks manager is at least as feature-rich as Firefox's, and they're both pretty awesome. I'm using them in tandem for different things, since FF's Flash support is a bit hit-and-miss in Linux.</p><p>Performance-wise, they're both blazing fast even on a modest single-core/1GB system. My ancient notebook stutters a bit, but then it stutters while running a freaking text editor. Maybe you need a new computer, or use lynx.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand you .
Is there some kind of doctrine that says " everything is crap except for what I use " ?
Can you not decide to use something that fits your purposes without smearing the alternatives ? Chrome 's address bar and bookmarks manager is at least as feature-rich as Firefox 's , and they 're both pretty awesome .
I 'm using them in tandem for different things , since FF 's Flash support is a bit hit-and-miss in Linux.Performance-wise , they 're both blazing fast even on a modest single-core/1GB system .
My ancient notebook stutters a bit , but then it stutters while running a freaking text editor .
Maybe you need a new computer , or use lynx .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand you.
Is there some kind of doctrine that says "everything is crap except for what I use"?
Can you not decide to use something that fits your purposes without smearing the alternatives?Chrome's address bar and bookmarks manager is at least as feature-rich as Firefox's, and they're both pretty awesome.
I'm using them in tandem for different things, since FF's Flash support is a bit hit-and-miss in Linux.Performance-wise, they're both blazing fast even on a modest single-core/1GB system.
My ancient notebook stutters a bit, but then it stutters while running a freaking text editor.
Maybe you need a new computer, or use lynx.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500</id>
	<title>Jumping ship from IE?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262423280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.</p><p>I'd be willing to bet its almost entirely loss of Firefox users (like myself), as Firefox has become a bloated, buggy, slow pile of crap that would make IE6 proud.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.I 'd be willing to bet its almost entirely loss of Firefox users ( like myself ) , as Firefox has become a bloated , buggy , slow pile of crap that would make IE6 proud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.I'd be willing to bet its almost entirely loss of Firefox users (like myself), as Firefox has become a bloated, buggy, slow pile of crap that would make IE6 proud.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629170</id>
	<title>Re:Getting off the train to crazytown</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262452320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Spot on.
</p><p>Last year I visited a large corporation to see a demo of their latest web-enabled product. Their field engineers had to have Windows and IE6 on their laptops to tap into the company servers, but to demo their standards-compliant web app they all had to have Firefox as well.  Open Source gets the work done, it's future-proof, and hopefully this is only the first shocking example of this bureaucracy-laden company's shift away from proprietary to open.  (Wouldn't count on it... their market-capturing strategies are a lot like Microsoft's in some respects. You never know, though...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Spot on .
Last year I visited a large corporation to see a demo of their latest web-enabled product .
Their field engineers had to have Windows and IE6 on their laptops to tap into the company servers , but to demo their standards-compliant web app they all had to have Firefox as well .
Open Source gets the work done , it 's future-proof , and hopefully this is only the first shocking example of this bureaucracy-laden company 's shift away from proprietary to open .
( Would n't count on it... their market-capturing strategies are a lot like Microsoft 's in some respects .
You never know , though... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Spot on.
Last year I visited a large corporation to see a demo of their latest web-enabled product.
Their field engineers had to have Windows and IE6 on their laptops to tap into the company servers, but to demo their standards-compliant web app they all had to have Firefox as well.
Open Source gets the work done, it's future-proof, and hopefully this is only the first shocking example of this bureaucracy-laden company's shift away from proprietary to open.
(Wouldn't count on it... their market-capturing strategies are a lot like Microsoft's in some respects.
You never know, though...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628180</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome on Ubuntu</title>
	<author>inamorty</author>
	<datestamp>1262441400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What's not to like (other than a current lack of an official ubuntu theme)?</p></div><p>I have just the solution. <a href="http://www.jetpens.com/product\_info.php/cPath/221\_534/products\_id/2480" title="jetpens.com" rel="nofollow">Bring the official ubuntu theme around with you anywhere.</a> [jetpens.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's not to like ( other than a current lack of an official ubuntu theme ) ? I have just the solution .
Bring the official ubuntu theme around with you anywhere .
[ jetpens.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's not to like (other than a current lack of an official ubuntu theme)?I have just the solution.
Bring the official ubuntu theme around with you anywhere.
[jetpens.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625570</id>
	<title>Re:Getting off the train to crazytown</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262423700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, no kidding. Back in '03 I was writing a new corporate web app. This was at a time before Firefox  ( still Phoenix<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/firebird) when IE had 98\% of the market. I begged my boss to make web standards a requirement. That was denied. I still coded my part to standards, but my coworkers thought I was nuts predicting other browsers to arise. Yeah, now its still ie 6 only. I think I retroactively win that argument.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , no kidding .
Back in '03 I was writing a new corporate web app .
This was at a time before Firefox ( still Phoenix /firebird ) when IE had 98 \ % of the market .
I begged my boss to make web standards a requirement .
That was denied .
I still coded my part to standards , but my coworkers thought I was nuts predicting other browsers to arise .
Yeah , now its still ie 6 only .
I think I retroactively win that argument .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, no kidding.
Back in '03 I was writing a new corporate web app.
This was at a time before Firefox  ( still Phoenix /firebird) when IE had 98\% of the market.
I begged my boss to make web standards a requirement.
That was denied.
I still coded my part to standards, but my coworkers thought I was nuts predicting other browsers to arise.
Yeah, now its still ie 6 only.
I think I retroactively win that argument.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628374</id>
	<title>Wait for survey of IT managers</title>
	<author>deanston</author>
	<datestamp>1262443560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For most MS shops still sticking to IE6 as the officially supported browser, this is no surprise nor meaningful. Just confirms corporate and Windows users use more than IE. Safari users unaffected.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For most MS shops still sticking to IE6 as the officially supported browser , this is no surprise nor meaningful .
Just confirms corporate and Windows users use more than IE .
Safari users unaffected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For most MS shops still sticking to IE6 as the officially supported browser, this is no surprise nor meaningful.
Just confirms corporate and Windows users use more than IE.
Safari users unaffected.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628106</id>
	<title>Everyone but MS grits teeth, welcomes Chrome</title>
	<author>David Gerard</author>
	<datestamp>1262440740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"We absolutely promise that we only want to completely screw over Microsoft with this, and certainly not Mozilla Firefox," said Google's Sundar Pichai. "That we put a pile of our sponsored Mozilla developers on the project is completely irrelevant. We're <i>not evil</i>, remember."</p><p>"We are so, so <i>happy</i> with Google Chrome," mumbled Mozilla CEO John Lilly through gritted teeth. "That most of our income is from Google has no bearing on me making this statement."</p><p>Microsoft was unfazed. "Browsers don't need to be integrated with online apps," said marketing developer Ian Moulster. "Certainly not like the operating system<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I'll just get back to you."</p><p>Google's new browser will give you their web and email services, photo processing, mapping, office applications that will run in said browser and will make you a cup of tea. This is all paid for by personally-directed text ads in your tea leaves, based on analysing a DNA sample taken when you sip the tea and sending your genetic code back to Google for future targeting.</p><p>Pichai stressed that Google would maintain complete confidentiality within the marketing department of whatever the browser accessed concerning your confidential business data, bank account details, medical information and personal preferences in pornography. "We're Google. <i>We know where you live.</i> In a completely not evil way. Sponsored link: Get Chrome Browsers on google.com. Or we'll make you use Windows Live."</p><p> <a href="http://newstechnica.com/2008/09/02/everyone-except-microsoft-grits-teeth-welcomes-google-chrome-web-browser/" title="newstechnica.com">(link)</a> [newstechnica.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" We absolutely promise that we only want to completely screw over Microsoft with this , and certainly not Mozilla Firefox , " said Google 's Sundar Pichai .
" That we put a pile of our sponsored Mozilla developers on the project is completely irrelevant .
We 're not evil , remember .
" " We are so , so happy with Google Chrome , " mumbled Mozilla CEO John Lilly through gritted teeth .
" That most of our income is from Google has no bearing on me making this statement .
" Microsoft was unfazed .
" Browsers do n't need to be integrated with online apps , " said marketing developer Ian Moulster .
" Certainly not like the operating system ... I 'll just get back to you .
" Google 's new browser will give you their web and email services , photo processing , mapping , office applications that will run in said browser and will make you a cup of tea .
This is all paid for by personally-directed text ads in your tea leaves , based on analysing a DNA sample taken when you sip the tea and sending your genetic code back to Google for future targeting.Pichai stressed that Google would maintain complete confidentiality within the marketing department of whatever the browser accessed concerning your confidential business data , bank account details , medical information and personal preferences in pornography .
" We 're Google .
We know where you live .
In a completely not evil way .
Sponsored link : Get Chrome Browsers on google.com .
Or we 'll make you use Windows Live .
" ( link ) [ newstechnica.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We absolutely promise that we only want to completely screw over Microsoft with this, and certainly not Mozilla Firefox," said Google's Sundar Pichai.
"That we put a pile of our sponsored Mozilla developers on the project is completely irrelevant.
We're not evil, remember.
""We are so, so happy with Google Chrome," mumbled Mozilla CEO John Lilly through gritted teeth.
"That most of our income is from Google has no bearing on me making this statement.
"Microsoft was unfazed.
"Browsers don't need to be integrated with online apps," said marketing developer Ian Moulster.
"Certainly not like the operating system ... I'll just get back to you.
"Google's new browser will give you their web and email services, photo processing, mapping, office applications that will run in said browser and will make you a cup of tea.
This is all paid for by personally-directed text ads in your tea leaves, based on analysing a DNA sample taken when you sip the tea and sending your genetic code back to Google for future targeting.Pichai stressed that Google would maintain complete confidentiality within the marketing department of whatever the browser accessed concerning your confidential business data, bank account details, medical information and personal preferences in pornography.
"We're Google.
We know where you live.
In a completely not evil way.
Sponsored link: Get Chrome Browsers on google.com.
Or we'll make you use Windows Live.
" (link) [newstechnica.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627288</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing to do with the OS X version</title>
	<author>The J Kid</author>
	<datestamp>1262434620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I <i>have</i> replaced Safari with Chrome as my default browser on Mac.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have replaced Safari with Chrome as my default browser on Mac .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have replaced Safari with Chrome as my default browser on Mac.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30632660</id>
	<title>Re:Getting off the train to crazytown</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262543820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>MS has been making some good moves.  Silverlight is probably their biggest problem right now as far as interoperability goes, and even then there's moonlight.  But other than that, they seem to be moving forward on standards.  Don't they actually use JQuery as part of their standard web app development package.  They realize they aren't the only browser in town anymore, and they are making big inroads in web app development to make people want to use their platform including open sourcing ASP.Net MVC.  They are a quite far from where they were in the old days with ActiveX. I don't even think they want people to go that route anymore. They realize they will have to embrace openness to compete on the web.</htmltext>
<tokenext>MS has been making some good moves .
Silverlight is probably their biggest problem right now as far as interoperability goes , and even then there 's moonlight .
But other than that , they seem to be moving forward on standards .
Do n't they actually use JQuery as part of their standard web app development package .
They realize they are n't the only browser in town anymore , and they are making big inroads in web app development to make people want to use their platform including open sourcing ASP.Net MVC .
They are a quite far from where they were in the old days with ActiveX .
I do n't even think they want people to go that route anymore .
They realize they will have to embrace openness to compete on the web .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS has been making some good moves.
Silverlight is probably their biggest problem right now as far as interoperability goes, and even then there's moonlight.
But other than that, they seem to be moving forward on standards.
Don't they actually use JQuery as part of their standard web app development package.
They realize they aren't the only browser in town anymore, and they are making big inroads in web app development to make people want to use their platform including open sourcing ASP.Net MVC.
They are a quite far from where they were in the old days with ActiveX.
I don't even think they want people to go that route anymore.
They realize they will have to embrace openness to compete on the web.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629790</id>
	<title>Re:Was waiting for Chrome on OSX until...</title>
	<author>mqduck</author>
	<datestamp>1262460180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Seriously, google, do I need to see on every one of your sites your insipid little ADs pushing me to use your browser on OSX<br>now?</p></div><p>"Ad" is an abbreviation for advertisement. It is not an acronym.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , google , do I need to see on every one of your sites your insipid little ADs pushing me to use your browser on OSXnow ?
" Ad " is an abbreviation for advertisement .
It is not an acronym .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, google, do I need to see on every one of your sites your insipid little ADs pushing me to use your browser on OSXnow?
"Ad" is an abbreviation for advertisement.
It is not an acronym.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625540</id>
	<title>this is 6oatsex</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262423580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">distended. AAl I bunc4 of gay negros</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>distended .
AAl I bunc4 of gay negros [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>distended.
AAl I bunc4 of gay negros [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625878</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome on Ubuntu</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262425620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What's not to like (other than a current lack of an official ubuntu theme)?</i></p><p>The lack of AdBlock Plus? How about the annoying and frequently repeated ads on Hulu that make you click on stuff? How about your viewing, usage habits, history, plugins, etc all being tracked by Google? I mean I could go on.</p><p>It's a fucking browser. Just like any other piece of software there are plenty of things to like and not like.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's not to like ( other than a current lack of an official ubuntu theme ) ? The lack of AdBlock Plus ?
How about the annoying and frequently repeated ads on Hulu that make you click on stuff ?
How about your viewing , usage habits , history , plugins , etc all being tracked by Google ?
I mean I could go on.It 's a fucking browser .
Just like any other piece of software there are plenty of things to like and not like .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's not to like (other than a current lack of an official ubuntu theme)?The lack of AdBlock Plus?
How about the annoying and frequently repeated ads on Hulu that make you click on stuff?
How about your viewing, usage habits, history, plugins, etc all being tracked by Google?
I mean I could go on.It's a fucking browser.
Just like any other piece of software there are plenty of things to like and not like.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625404</id>
	<title>Re:Was waiting for Chrome on OSX until...</title>
	<author>Azureflare</author>
	<datestamp>1262422860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ha, you know that's actually really funny because I've seen those ads too. And I use Google Chrome on a Mac! I'm thinking "Jeez, that's annoying, but even more so because I'm actually using the browser to view the ad!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ha , you know that 's actually really funny because I 've seen those ads too .
And I use Google Chrome on a Mac !
I 'm thinking " Jeez , that 's annoying , but even more so because I 'm actually using the browser to view the ad !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ha, you know that's actually really funny because I've seen those ads too.
And I use Google Chrome on a Mac!
I'm thinking "Jeez, that's annoying, but even more so because I'm actually using the browser to view the ad!
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628512</id>
	<title>Re:And yet...</title>
	<author>Paradigm\_Complex</author>
	<datestamp>1262445240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But yet, for a netbook, Chrome is the best choice because it uses the smallest amount of real estate for non-browser window information.</p></div><p>By default, yes.  After configuring, not necessarily.  Firefox's UI is *very* configurable, and I wouldn't be surprised if fans of other browsers can make similar claims for their preferred browsers.  I expect most people who care enough about their screen real estate to chose their browser based on that fact, would also be willing to learn to configure their browser to get even more real estate, thereby nullifying any advantage Chrome may have by default.  I own an eeepc 701 - you know, with the 7" screen.  I'm one of those people where the screen real estate really matters.<br> <br>

 installed vimperator so firefox can do everything from the keyboard alone, as well as fire gestures so I can do (almost) everything from the mouse alone, all without any of the standard buttons and bars and what not.  There is no address bar or search box or stop button or home button.  All I've got, beyond the webpage itself: the tab bar if there's multiple tabs (which I could disable if I chose too), the status bar (which I could also disable if I chose too), and one line for vimperator.  I'm tempted to see if I can patch vimperator to get that to autohide, so that I could have 100\% of firefox's window dedicated to the page itself when I'm not using vimperator's ex line.<br> <br>

Chrome is fast, which is great for underpowered netbooks.  Even the latest firefox beta's, which are aimed at improving speed, aren't quite where Chrome is.  However, in terms of screen real estate, Chrome's default advantage isn't worth much if anything for those who care about it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But yet , for a netbook , Chrome is the best choice because it uses the smallest amount of real estate for non-browser window information.By default , yes .
After configuring , not necessarily .
Firefox 's UI is * very * configurable , and I would n't be surprised if fans of other browsers can make similar claims for their preferred browsers .
I expect most people who care enough about their screen real estate to chose their browser based on that fact , would also be willing to learn to configure their browser to get even more real estate , thereby nullifying any advantage Chrome may have by default .
I own an eeepc 701 - you know , with the 7 " screen .
I 'm one of those people where the screen real estate really matters .
installed vimperator so firefox can do everything from the keyboard alone , as well as fire gestures so I can do ( almost ) everything from the mouse alone , all without any of the standard buttons and bars and what not .
There is no address bar or search box or stop button or home button .
All I 've got , beyond the webpage itself : the tab bar if there 's multiple tabs ( which I could disable if I chose too ) , the status bar ( which I could also disable if I chose too ) , and one line for vimperator .
I 'm tempted to see if I can patch vimperator to get that to autohide , so that I could have 100 \ % of firefox 's window dedicated to the page itself when I 'm not using vimperator 's ex line .
Chrome is fast , which is great for underpowered netbooks .
Even the latest firefox beta 's , which are aimed at improving speed , are n't quite where Chrome is .
However , in terms of screen real estate , Chrome 's default advantage is n't worth much if anything for those who care about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But yet, for a netbook, Chrome is the best choice because it uses the smallest amount of real estate for non-browser window information.By default, yes.
After configuring, not necessarily.
Firefox's UI is *very* configurable, and I wouldn't be surprised if fans of other browsers can make similar claims for their preferred browsers.
I expect most people who care enough about their screen real estate to chose their browser based on that fact, would also be willing to learn to configure their browser to get even more real estate, thereby nullifying any advantage Chrome may have by default.
I own an eeepc 701 - you know, with the 7" screen.
I'm one of those people where the screen real estate really matters.
installed vimperator so firefox can do everything from the keyboard alone, as well as fire gestures so I can do (almost) everything from the mouse alone, all without any of the standard buttons and bars and what not.
There is no address bar or search box or stop button or home button.
All I've got, beyond the webpage itself: the tab bar if there's multiple tabs (which I could disable if I chose too), the status bar (which I could also disable if I chose too), and one line for vimperator.
I'm tempted to see if I can patch vimperator to get that to autohide, so that I could have 100\% of firefox's window dedicated to the page itself when I'm not using vimperator's ex line.
Chrome is fast, which is great for underpowered netbooks.
Even the latest firefox beta's, which are aimed at improving speed, aren't quite where Chrome is.
However, in terms of screen real estate, Chrome's default advantage isn't worth much if anything for those who care about it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626208</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome</title>
	<author>juicyfruit</author>
	<datestamp>1262427720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Has passed? StatCounter shows they already passed in August 2008, far before Chrome beta for Mac or Linux was available.</i>
<p>
That's a pretty neat trick, given that Google Chrome was only released in September 2008.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has passed ?
StatCounter shows they already passed in August 2008 , far before Chrome beta for Mac or Linux was available .
That 's a pretty neat trick , given that Google Chrome was only released in September 2008 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has passed?
StatCounter shows they already passed in August 2008, far before Chrome beta for Mac or Linux was available.
That's a pretty neat trick, given that Google Chrome was only released in September 2008.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628756</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome on Ubuntu</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262447880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The GUI is crap, and the lack of security settings and features laughable.<br>I don't expect a regular user to notice it, though. The browser is perfectly usable as is. I just hope it takes users away from IE rather than the far superior FF which will be forced to emulate it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The GUI is crap , and the lack of security settings and features laughable.I do n't expect a regular user to notice it , though .
The browser is perfectly usable as is .
I just hope it takes users away from IE rather than the far superior FF which will be forced to emulate it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The GUI is crap, and the lack of security settings and features laughable.I don't expect a regular user to notice it, though.
The browser is perfectly usable as is.
I just hope it takes users away from IE rather than the far superior FF which will be forced to emulate it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844</id>
	<title>Nothing to do with the OS X version</title>
	<author>gyrogeerloose</author>
	<datestamp>1262425380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the summary:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>This may be partially explained by the release of the Chrome beta on Mac</p> </div><p>As an Mac user who's tried out the OS X version of Chrome, I can assure you that no one is abandoning Safari for it. While it's a decent enough browser for a beta, there are enough annoying things about it to make me wait until the next version to decide whether or not it will replace Safari (or Firefox; I switch between the two) as my primary browser.</p><p>If anything, it's more likely that the relative few Windows users who have been trying Safari for Windows have switched over to Chrome, at least temporarily.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the summary : This may be partially explained by the release of the Chrome beta on Mac As an Mac user who 's tried out the OS X version of Chrome , I can assure you that no one is abandoning Safari for it .
While it 's a decent enough browser for a beta , there are enough annoying things about it to make me wait until the next version to decide whether or not it will replace Safari ( or Firefox ; I switch between the two ) as my primary browser.If anything , it 's more likely that the relative few Windows users who have been trying Safari for Windows have switched over to Chrome , at least temporarily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the summary:This may be partially explained by the release of the Chrome beta on Mac As an Mac user who's tried out the OS X version of Chrome, I can assure you that no one is abandoning Safari for it.
While it's a decent enough browser for a beta, there are enough annoying things about it to make me wait until the next version to decide whether or not it will replace Safari (or Firefox; I switch between the two) as my primary browser.If anything, it's more likely that the relative few Windows users who have been trying Safari for Windows have switched over to Chrome, at least temporarily.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626142</id>
	<title>Re:Worthless</title>
	<author>pudge</author>
	<datestamp>1262427360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the odds seem very good that you will be counted.</p></div><p>When you play the odds, you are admitting your sampling methodolgy is flawed.</p><p>This is similar to the Neilsen ratings.  Sure, it might work for many people, but there will be significant demographics that will be left out, making the data not just generally worthless, but damaging.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the odds seem very good that you will be counted.When you play the odds , you are admitting your sampling methodolgy is flawed.This is similar to the Neilsen ratings .
Sure , it might work for many people , but there will be significant demographics that will be left out , making the data not just generally worthless , but damaging .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the odds seem very good that you will be counted.When you play the odds, you are admitting your sampling methodolgy is flawed.This is similar to the Neilsen ratings.
Sure, it might work for many people, but there will be significant demographics that will be left out, making the data not just generally worthless, but damaging.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625592</id>
	<title>Re:Getting off the train to crazytown</title>
	<author>tgd</author>
	<datestamp>1262423760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having been on both sides of that -- at a company ignorantly producing software that required IE, and at companies that had to support systems still running IE because of that precide problem, its not organizations standardizing on the MS suite, the problem stemmed from the shortage of qualified web application developers at the tail end of the dot-com boom. There were vast numbers of "developers" getting into the space that had absolutely no idea what they were doing, and the non-technical companies who were hiring engineers into corporate IT departments *really* got the short stick when it came to hiring. When real software companies were snapping up anyone who could muddle through code, you can imagine the sort of engineers that were ending up at insurance companies and hospitals and companies like that.</p><p>The organizations were stuck with piles of crap because of their engineers, not because of some grand corporate policy or strategy. Find some old-timers at those companies and buy them a beer and they'll tell you all about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having been on both sides of that -- at a company ignorantly producing software that required IE , and at companies that had to support systems still running IE because of that precide problem , its not organizations standardizing on the MS suite , the problem stemmed from the shortage of qualified web application developers at the tail end of the dot-com boom .
There were vast numbers of " developers " getting into the space that had absolutely no idea what they were doing , and the non-technical companies who were hiring engineers into corporate IT departments * really * got the short stick when it came to hiring .
When real software companies were snapping up anyone who could muddle through code , you can imagine the sort of engineers that were ending up at insurance companies and hospitals and companies like that.The organizations were stuck with piles of crap because of their engineers , not because of some grand corporate policy or strategy .
Find some old-timers at those companies and buy them a beer and they 'll tell you all about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having been on both sides of that -- at a company ignorantly producing software that required IE, and at companies that had to support systems still running IE because of that precide problem, its not organizations standardizing on the MS suite, the problem stemmed from the shortage of qualified web application developers at the tail end of the dot-com boom.
There were vast numbers of "developers" getting into the space that had absolutely no idea what they were doing, and the non-technical companies who were hiring engineers into corporate IT departments *really* got the short stick when it came to hiring.
When real software companies were snapping up anyone who could muddle through code, you can imagine the sort of engineers that were ending up at insurance companies and hospitals and companies like that.The organizations were stuck with piles of crap because of their engineers, not because of some grand corporate policy or strategy.
Find some old-timers at those companies and buy them a beer and they'll tell you all about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625310</id>
	<title>Worthless</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262465460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Such metrics are almost always worthless.  And such is the case here.  Their methodology is fundamentally flawed, and you can't fix flawed methodology by just getting more of it.</p><p>Ars Technica <a href="http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/02/mac-market-share.ars" title="arstechnica.com">notes</a> [arstechnica.com], <i>'The company tracks OS and browser use among "member sites" that use Net Applications' tracking services, which the company says encompasses data from some 160 million users per month. This means that the only OS and browser numbers being tracked are those from users who specifically visit those member sites, which include the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, and InformationWeek. If specific demographics of users&mdash;like, say, Linux users&mdash;don't tend to read those types of sites, they are going to be underrepresented, and similarly, other demographics may be overrepresented.</i></p><p>It obviously could be the case that Chrome is used by people more likely to use those "member sites" than people who use Safari.</p><p>Unfortunately, Ars Technica then writes, <i>'That being said, browser metrics such as these aren't worthless. Even though they may be an inaccurate way to make comparisons between operating systems, they provide a good picture when it comes to trends within a specific OS. For example, Net Applications tracked the Mac OS at 7.3 percent at the end of 2007 and 9.63 percent at the end of 2008, showing more than a 2.6 percentage point jump in only a year for the Mac. In this sense, it doesn't matter if Mac users tend to visit the Wall Street Journal's website more than Linux users. The trend is clearly showing that Mac users, with all their unique browsing habits, are growing steadily.'</i></p><p>That's obviously false, because it doesn't take into account the fact that demographics can trend from year to year (perhaps the WSJ introduced a new, and popular, Mac-specific section on their web site).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Such metrics are almost always worthless .
And such is the case here .
Their methodology is fundamentally flawed , and you ca n't fix flawed methodology by just getting more of it.Ars Technica notes [ arstechnica.com ] , 'The company tracks OS and browser use among " member sites " that use Net Applications ' tracking services , which the company says encompasses data from some 160 million users per month .
This means that the only OS and browser numbers being tracked are those from users who specifically visit those member sites , which include the New York Times , the Wall Street Journal , Forbes , and InformationWeek .
If specific demographics of users    like , say , Linux users    do n't tend to read those types of sites , they are going to be underrepresented , and similarly , other demographics may be overrepresented.It obviously could be the case that Chrome is used by people more likely to use those " member sites " than people who use Safari.Unfortunately , Ars Technica then writes , 'That being said , browser metrics such as these are n't worthless .
Even though they may be an inaccurate way to make comparisons between operating systems , they provide a good picture when it comes to trends within a specific OS .
For example , Net Applications tracked the Mac OS at 7.3 percent at the end of 2007 and 9.63 percent at the end of 2008 , showing more than a 2.6 percentage point jump in only a year for the Mac .
In this sense , it does n't matter if Mac users tend to visit the Wall Street Journal 's website more than Linux users .
The trend is clearly showing that Mac users , with all their unique browsing habits , are growing steadily .
'That 's obviously false , because it does n't take into account the fact that demographics can trend from year to year ( perhaps the WSJ introduced a new , and popular , Mac-specific section on their web site ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Such metrics are almost always worthless.
And such is the case here.
Their methodology is fundamentally flawed, and you can't fix flawed methodology by just getting more of it.Ars Technica notes [arstechnica.com], 'The company tracks OS and browser use among "member sites" that use Net Applications' tracking services, which the company says encompasses data from some 160 million users per month.
This means that the only OS and browser numbers being tracked are those from users who specifically visit those member sites, which include the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, and InformationWeek.
If specific demographics of users—like, say, Linux users—don't tend to read those types of sites, they are going to be underrepresented, and similarly, other demographics may be overrepresented.It obviously could be the case that Chrome is used by people more likely to use those "member sites" than people who use Safari.Unfortunately, Ars Technica then writes, 'That being said, browser metrics such as these aren't worthless.
Even though they may be an inaccurate way to make comparisons between operating systems, they provide a good picture when it comes to trends within a specific OS.
For example, Net Applications tracked the Mac OS at 7.3 percent at the end of 2007 and 9.63 percent at the end of 2008, showing more than a 2.6 percentage point jump in only a year for the Mac.
In this sense, it doesn't matter if Mac users tend to visit the Wall Street Journal's website more than Linux users.
The trend is clearly showing that Mac users, with all their unique browsing habits, are growing steadily.
'That's obviously false, because it doesn't take into account the fact that demographics can trend from year to year (perhaps the WSJ introduced a new, and popular, Mac-specific section on their web site).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625648</id>
	<title>Re:Worthless</title>
	<author>IntlHarvester</author>
	<datestamp>1262424120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Eh, maybe the stats are "worthless" to sad OS/Browser fanboys who are arguing over every last 0.1\%.</p><p>But the general trend of the web browser is useful and interesting. These kinds of browser stats are how we tracked the rise-and-fall of Netscape, the rise and stagnation of IE, and the rise of Firefox. People do use this sort of information for development and testing priority, flawed methodology and all.</p><p>And you will never have a non-"flawed" methodology for capturing this information, even for the users on your own site. (How do you identify a unique user? how do you know they aren't faking their user agent string? Who is a person and who is a bot? etc) If you can't deal with fuzzy information, don't leave the basement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Eh , maybe the stats are " worthless " to sad OS/Browser fanboys who are arguing over every last 0.1 \ % .But the general trend of the web browser is useful and interesting .
These kinds of browser stats are how we tracked the rise-and-fall of Netscape , the rise and stagnation of IE , and the rise of Firefox .
People do use this sort of information for development and testing priority , flawed methodology and all.And you will never have a non- " flawed " methodology for capturing this information , even for the users on your own site .
( How do you identify a unique user ?
how do you know they are n't faking their user agent string ?
Who is a person and who is a bot ?
etc ) If you ca n't deal with fuzzy information , do n't leave the basement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eh, maybe the stats are "worthless" to sad OS/Browser fanboys who are arguing over every last 0.1\%.But the general trend of the web browser is useful and interesting.
These kinds of browser stats are how we tracked the rise-and-fall of Netscape, the rise and stagnation of IE, and the rise of Firefox.
People do use this sort of information for development and testing priority, flawed methodology and all.And you will never have a non-"flawed" methodology for capturing this information, even for the users on your own site.
(How do you identify a unique user?
how do you know they aren't faking their user agent string?
Who is a person and who is a bot?
etc) If you can't deal with fuzzy information, don't leave the basement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30632032</id>
	<title>Chrome is still fail -can't adjust the fonts</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1262538240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I know, none of the kids below 35 understand why in the world you'd want to adjust fontsize - but it bloody well becomes necessary! And Chrome is just a joke browser until they add that.</p><p>Now some kid is going to say:</p><p>* Just zoom in.</p><p>Zoom is NOT the same as making fonts larger, sure they become larger when you zoom in but so does the entire damn page, so you have to sit and scroll with the mouse left right left right left right FOR EACH DAMN LINE! And you can't see anything else on the page!?!</p><p>It has to be like with firefox, where it makes JUST THE FONTS larger, and then reflows the page so the layout is the same (you know, the way html was supposed to work!?)</p><p>and some might say "just go into options and set fonts"</p><p>Those are idiots. Have you just arrived on the web today? What sick planet are you from where you think that the same damn font size would work for all pages on the planet? THEY DONT</p><p>And of course - that doesn't work to begin with, because like IE, they only use the font size preferences on pages which do not use stylesheets - and everybody is abusing stylesheets to make the web look unreadable these days.</p><p>So google, you suck. Do better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I know , none of the kids below 35 understand why in the world you 'd want to adjust fontsize - but it bloody well becomes necessary !
And Chrome is just a joke browser until they add that.Now some kid is going to say : * Just zoom in.Zoom is NOT the same as making fonts larger , sure they become larger when you zoom in but so does the entire damn page , so you have to sit and scroll with the mouse left right left right left right FOR EACH DAMN LINE !
And you ca n't see anything else on the page ! ?
! It has to be like with firefox , where it makes JUST THE FONTS larger , and then reflows the page so the layout is the same ( you know , the way html was supposed to work ! ?
) and some might say " just go into options and set fonts " Those are idiots .
Have you just arrived on the web today ?
What sick planet are you from where you think that the same damn font size would work for all pages on the planet ?
THEY DONTAnd of course - that does n't work to begin with , because like IE , they only use the font size preferences on pages which do not use stylesheets - and everybody is abusing stylesheets to make the web look unreadable these days.So google , you suck .
Do better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I know, none of the kids below 35 understand why in the world you'd want to adjust fontsize - but it bloody well becomes necessary!
And Chrome is just a joke browser until they add that.Now some kid is going to say:* Just zoom in.Zoom is NOT the same as making fonts larger, sure they become larger when you zoom in but so does the entire damn page, so you have to sit and scroll with the mouse left right left right left right FOR EACH DAMN LINE!
And you can't see anything else on the page!?
!It has to be like with firefox, where it makes JUST THE FONTS larger, and then reflows the page so the layout is the same (you know, the way html was supposed to work!?
)and some might say "just go into options and set fonts"Those are idiots.
Have you just arrived on the web today?
What sick planet are you from where you think that the same damn font size would work for all pages on the planet?
THEY DONTAnd of course - that doesn't work to begin with, because like IE, they only use the font size preferences on pages which do not use stylesheets - and everybody is abusing stylesheets to make the web look unreadable these days.So google, you suck.
Do better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625788</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1262424960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not really much wiser users; influence of people setting up OS on home machines (which are also much older on average)</p><p>See, in those post-soviet countries legal Windows is almost unheard of (shift towards laptops changes things of course, but only a bit; not only they are smaller part of market, notable number of them comes essentially without OS (FreeDOS? Some Linux booting into textmode? LiveCD? Without drivers for the hardware...). So somebody vaguely fluent in "computers" will set up pirated copy, usually. Putting there a better browser among other alternatives (like better ICQ client). Opera is preferred because it works very good on slow and RAM starved (by todays standards) machines.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really much wiser users ; influence of people setting up OS on home machines ( which are also much older on average ) See , in those post-soviet countries legal Windows is almost unheard of ( shift towards laptops changes things of course , but only a bit ; not only they are smaller part of market , notable number of them comes essentially without OS ( FreeDOS ?
Some Linux booting into textmode ?
LiveCD ? Without drivers for the hardware... ) .
So somebody vaguely fluent in " computers " will set up pirated copy , usually .
Putting there a better browser among other alternatives ( like better ICQ client ) .
Opera is preferred because it works very good on slow and RAM starved ( by todays standards ) machines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really much wiser users; influence of people setting up OS on home machines (which are also much older on average)See, in those post-soviet countries legal Windows is almost unheard of (shift towards laptops changes things of course, but only a bit; not only they are smaller part of market, notable number of them comes essentially without OS (FreeDOS?
Some Linux booting into textmode?
LiveCD? Without drivers for the hardware...).
So somebody vaguely fluent in "computers" will set up pirated copy, usually.
Putting there a better browser among other alternatives (like better ICQ client).
Opera is preferred because it works very good on slow and RAM starved (by todays standards) machines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627746</id>
	<title>Re:Jumping ship from IE?</title>
	<author>Revenger75</author>
	<datestamp>1262437860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm pretty sure that some induhviduals who go to "The Google" might notice the Google ad in the upper-right corner stating "A faster way to browse the web" with an installation button.  Granted they might not know that Google Chrome is an alternate web browser to Internet Explorer, but these are the same people who click on all the pop-up ads and think they actually are the one millionth visitor.  As far as they are concerned, it still brings them to the same Internet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure that some induhviduals who go to " The Google " might notice the Google ad in the upper-right corner stating " A faster way to browse the web " with an installation button .
Granted they might not know that Google Chrome is an alternate web browser to Internet Explorer , but these are the same people who click on all the pop-up ads and think they actually are the one millionth visitor .
As far as they are concerned , it still brings them to the same Internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure that some induhviduals who go to "The Google" might notice the Google ad in the upper-right corner stating "A faster way to browse the web" with an installation button.
Granted they might not know that Google Chrome is an alternate web browser to Internet Explorer, but these are the same people who click on all the pop-up ads and think they actually are the one millionth visitor.
As far as they are concerned, it still brings them to the same Internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628998</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome on Ubuntu</title>
	<author>martin-boundary</author>
	<datestamp>1262450340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>What's not to like (other than a current lack of an official
  ubuntu theme)?</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Can it run in a terminal in text mode?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's not to like ( other than a current lack of an official ubuntu theme ) ?
Can it run in a terminal in text mode ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's not to like (other than a current lack of an official
  ubuntu theme)?
Can it run in a terminal in text mode?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626620</id>
	<title>Incompetence will lose you market share...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262430180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Surprise surprise, Apple invests all its time and money in marketing and promotion for it's barely-improved plastic crap. I'm so sure they give a shit about browser performance or security. I'll stick with a functional browser like FireFox, thanks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Surprise surprise , Apple invests all its time and money in marketing and promotion for it 's barely-improved plastic crap .
I 'm so sure they give a shit about browser performance or security .
I 'll stick with a functional browser like FireFox , thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surprise surprise, Apple invests all its time and money in marketing and promotion for it's barely-improved plastic crap.
I'm so sure they give a shit about browser performance or security.
I'll stick with a functional browser like FireFox, thanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625918</id>
	<title>Re:IE 5.5 forever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262425920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't be ridiculous. Ie 5.5 sucks. Its rendering isn't consistant across nt 4.0, win 2000, win 95, win 98, win 98 se. If you want compatibility, stick with IE 5. No need to be stuck on the upgrade treadmill.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't be ridiculous .
Ie 5.5 sucks .
Its rendering is n't consistant across nt 4.0 , win 2000 , win 95 , win 98 , win 98 se .
If you want compatibility , stick with IE 5 .
No need to be stuck on the upgrade treadmill .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't be ridiculous.
Ie 5.5 sucks.
Its rendering isn't consistant across nt 4.0, win 2000, win 95, win 98, win 98 se.
If you want compatibility, stick with IE 5.
No need to be stuck on the upgrade treadmill.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626384</id>
	<title>I've seen an amazing rise in traffic from Chrome</title>
	<author>QuatermassX</author>
	<datestamp>1262428740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've seen the number of visitors to my web site using Chrome double in November and December with most of the visitors using 3.0.195.33 and split between Windows and Linux (with Windows having a slight edge). I'm really rather surprised at the surge, but thankful that standards-based web browsing will be the norm in the near future (at least amongst people fond of fine-art photography).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen the number of visitors to my web site using Chrome double in November and December with most of the visitors using 3.0.195.33 and split between Windows and Linux ( with Windows having a slight edge ) .
I 'm really rather surprised at the surge , but thankful that standards-based web browsing will be the norm in the near future ( at least amongst people fond of fine-art photography ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen the number of visitors to my web site using Chrome double in November and December with most of the visitors using 3.0.195.33 and split between Windows and Linux (with Windows having a slight edge).
I'm really rather surprised at the surge, but thankful that standards-based web browsing will be the norm in the near future (at least amongst people fond of fine-art photography).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30638318</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing to do with the OS X version</title>
	<author>alpayerturkmen</author>
	<datestamp>1262637360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am sorry to tell you this but I am not using Safari at all since the launch day of Chrome on Mac. And you know what, I have only seen a single site that is having a slight alignment problem on it. I am sure there are other people like me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am sorry to tell you this but I am not using Safari at all since the launch day of Chrome on Mac .
And you know what , I have only seen a single site that is having a slight alignment problem on it .
I am sure there are other people like me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am sorry to tell you this but I am not using Safari at all since the launch day of Chrome on Mac.
And you know what, I have only seen a single site that is having a slight alignment problem on it.
I am sure there are other people like me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625356</id>
	<title>Chrome is on the Droid, too...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262465760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That probably gave the figures a big bump. Using it right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That probably gave the figures a big bump .
Using it right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That probably gave the figures a big bump.
Using it right now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626686</id>
	<title>Re:Jumping ship from IE?</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1262430600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Features = bloat.</p><p>Remember Phoenix? Light,fast, nothing else.</p><p>It morphed into Firefox which is featureful and buggier. (I like the features so I don't run FF on slow PCs.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Features = bloat.Remember Phoenix ?
Light,fast , nothing else.It morphed into Firefox which is featureful and buggier .
( I like the features so I do n't run FF on slow PCs .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Features = bloat.Remember Phoenix?
Light,fast, nothing else.It morphed into Firefox which is featureful and buggier.
(I like the features so I don't run FF on slow PCs.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626356</id>
	<title>Re:And yet...</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1262428560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apart from customization mentioned already by other poster, I'm surprised that Opera Turbo, very low resource usage, definitely felt on slow hardware and built-in syncing weren't enough to keep you with Opera on a netbook.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apart from customization mentioned already by other poster , I 'm surprised that Opera Turbo , very low resource usage , definitely felt on slow hardware and built-in syncing were n't enough to keep you with Opera on a netbook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apart from customization mentioned already by other poster, I'm surprised that Opera Turbo, very low resource usage, definitely felt on slow hardware and built-in syncing weren't enough to keep you with Opera on a netbook.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30632514</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing to do with the OS X version</title>
	<author>Azureflare</author>
	<datestamp>1262542920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I may be slightly biased here, but I am a mac user who abandoned Firefox on Mac for Chrome.
<br> <br>
I never liked Safari, mainly because it was used by so many hackers to compromise mac systems.  I still use Safari for netflix though, since Chrome doesn't work with netflix. That's really the only problem I've run into with Chrome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I may be slightly biased here , but I am a mac user who abandoned Firefox on Mac for Chrome .
I never liked Safari , mainly because it was used by so many hackers to compromise mac systems .
I still use Safari for netflix though , since Chrome does n't work with netflix .
That 's really the only problem I 've run into with Chrome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I may be slightly biased here, but I am a mac user who abandoned Firefox on Mac for Chrome.
I never liked Safari, mainly because it was used by so many hackers to compromise mac systems.
I still use Safari for netflix though, since Chrome doesn't work with netflix.
That's really the only problem I've run into with Chrome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628492</id>
	<title>Does IEtab not work?</title>
	<author>rsborg</author>
	<datestamp>1262445060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I use IE sometimes; there's stuff I try to use that doesn't work in FF or Chrome, especially at work, where government sites still don't work well with either (CAC-enabled DoD sites, especially).</p></div></blockquote><p> Is there a reason you can't use IEtab on FF? At least you can ditch the malware-magnet IE application frame, even if you don't ditch the trident rendering engine.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use IE sometimes ; there 's stuff I try to use that does n't work in FF or Chrome , especially at work , where government sites still do n't work well with either ( CAC-enabled DoD sites , especially ) .
Is there a reason you ca n't use IEtab on FF ?
At least you can ditch the malware-magnet IE application frame , even if you do n't ditch the trident rendering engine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use IE sometimes; there's stuff I try to use that doesn't work in FF or Chrome, especially at work, where government sites still don't work well with either (CAC-enabled DoD sites, especially).
Is there a reason you can't use IEtab on FF?
At least you can ditch the malware-magnet IE application frame, even if you don't ditch the trident rendering engine.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30630634</id>
	<title>Re:Jumping ship from IE?</title>
	<author>True Grit</author>
	<datestamp>1262516280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.</p></div><p>At some point Firefox was in the exact same position, yet it eventually managed to take marketshare away from IE, and without the advantage of Google's ad budget.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I'd be willing to bet its almost entirely loss of Firefox users</p></div><p>At this point it probably doesn't even matter.  We don't even know yet how much of this rapid adoption is permanent or not.  Its a lot harder to guess who are the 'winners' and 'losers', especially long-term, with so many players now in the game.</p><p>Choice is good, and nothing beats a little friendly competition at getting a complacent player off their duff and back in the game (yes, I'm looking at you Firefox:  at some point you lost your 'lean-n-mean' under an avalanche of XUL chrome and plugin hell - you need to work on getting that back).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.At some point Firefox was in the exact same position , yet it eventually managed to take marketshare away from IE , and without the advantage of Google 's ad budget.I 'd be willing to bet its almost entirely loss of Firefox usersAt this point it probably does n't even matter .
We do n't even know yet how much of this rapid adoption is permanent or not .
Its a lot harder to guess who are the 'winners ' and 'losers ' , especially long-term , with so many players now in the game.Choice is good , and nothing beats a little friendly competition at getting a complacent player off their duff and back in the game ( yes , I 'm looking at you Firefox : at some point you lost your 'lean-n-mean ' under an avalanche of XUL chrome and plugin hell - you need to work on getting that back ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.At some point Firefox was in the exact same position, yet it eventually managed to take marketshare away from IE, and without the advantage of Google's ad budget.I'd be willing to bet its almost entirely loss of Firefox usersAt this point it probably doesn't even matter.
We don't even know yet how much of this rapid adoption is permanent or not.
Its a lot harder to guess who are the 'winners' and 'losers', especially long-term, with so many players now in the game.Choice is good, and nothing beats a little friendly competition at getting a complacent player off their duff and back in the game (yes, I'm looking at you Firefox:  at some point you lost your 'lean-n-mean' under an avalanche of XUL chrome and plugin hell - you need to work on getting that back).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30631496</id>
	<title>Re:I won't be using Chrome until ...</title>
	<author>Ash-Fox</author>
	<datestamp>1262532360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>they ship a Mac version that runs on PowerPC<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..</p></div></blockquote><p>I don't see the point in Apple wasting time in developing for a stagnant platform that no longer receives software even from Apple.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>they ship a Mac version that runs on PowerPC ..I do n't see the point in Apple wasting time in developing for a stagnant platform that no longer receives software even from Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they ship a Mac version that runs on PowerPC ..I don't see the point in Apple wasting time in developing for a stagnant platform that no longer receives software even from Apple.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627294</id>
	<title>Re:IE 5.5 forever</title>
	<author>Tumbleweed</author>
	<datestamp>1262434680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I don't know about everyone else, but Internet Explorer 5.5 is working pretty well here on my Windows NT 4 machines.</i></p><p>Dude, you should try Windows Millennium - WAY easier on system resources than that hog NT4! Plus, as the name 'Millennium' implies, it's probably Y2K-compliant. Ish.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know about everyone else , but Internet Explorer 5.5 is working pretty well here on my Windows NT 4 machines.Dude , you should try Windows Millennium - WAY easier on system resources than that hog NT4 !
Plus , as the name 'Millennium ' implies , it 's probably Y2K-compliant .
Ish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know about everyone else, but Internet Explorer 5.5 is working pretty well here on my Windows NT 4 machines.Dude, you should try Windows Millennium - WAY easier on system resources than that hog NT4!
Plus, as the name 'Millennium' implies, it's probably Y2K-compliant.
Ish.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625246</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625622</id>
	<title>Re:Worthless</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1262423940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course, it isn't particularly likely that all 160 million sites introduced popular new mac specific sections.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , it is n't particularly likely that all 160 million sites introduced popular new mac specific sections .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, it isn't particularly likely that all 160 million sites introduced popular new mac specific sections.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626094</id>
	<title>Re:Jumping ship from IE?</title>
	<author>BZ</author>
	<datestamp>1262427060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One other note...  Webkit and Gecko have different priorities in other ways too:  for example, correct behavior of CSS selectors in the face of DOM mutations is a top priority for Gecko (and hence behavior is correctin all the cases I know of) and is not for Webkit (and hence the behavior is not correct in various cases; "for now we will just worry about the common case, since it's a lot trickier to get the second case right" as the Webkit code comments say).  There are various other areas in which Webkit is behind Gecko in terms of standards support, and vice versa.  They seem to have different future development priorities (e.g. in terms of things like SMIL vs CSS Animations).</p><p>It's also not clear which is developing faster, and that aspect is subject to rapid change.  I think at this point there are more full-time engineers employed to work on Webkit than on the equivalent parts of Gecko.  That may or may not continue to be the case.</p><p>Another interesting question, of course, is IE.  IE9 has a bigger development team than either Webkit or Gecko, from what I can tell, and they're rapidly working on closing the existing gaps.  IE's support for CSS2.1 is better than either Webkit's \_or\_ Gecko's in my testing (easier to do in some ways because the spec has kept changing so in some cases Webkit/Gecko implement earlier versions).  Of course IE has a lot of catching up to do in other areas.</p><p>It'll be an interesting next few years all around.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One other note... Webkit and Gecko have different priorities in other ways too : for example , correct behavior of CSS selectors in the face of DOM mutations is a top priority for Gecko ( and hence behavior is correctin all the cases I know of ) and is not for Webkit ( and hence the behavior is not correct in various cases ; " for now we will just worry about the common case , since it 's a lot trickier to get the second case right " as the Webkit code comments say ) .
There are various other areas in which Webkit is behind Gecko in terms of standards support , and vice versa .
They seem to have different future development priorities ( e.g .
in terms of things like SMIL vs CSS Animations ) .It 's also not clear which is developing faster , and that aspect is subject to rapid change .
I think at this point there are more full-time engineers employed to work on Webkit than on the equivalent parts of Gecko .
That may or may not continue to be the case.Another interesting question , of course , is IE .
IE9 has a bigger development team than either Webkit or Gecko , from what I can tell , and they 're rapidly working on closing the existing gaps .
IE 's support for CSS2.1 is better than either Webkit 's \ _or \ _ Gecko 's in my testing ( easier to do in some ways because the spec has kept changing so in some cases Webkit/Gecko implement earlier versions ) .
Of course IE has a lot of catching up to do in other areas.It 'll be an interesting next few years all around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One other note...  Webkit and Gecko have different priorities in other ways too:  for example, correct behavior of CSS selectors in the face of DOM mutations is a top priority for Gecko (and hence behavior is correctin all the cases I know of) and is not for Webkit (and hence the behavior is not correct in various cases; "for now we will just worry about the common case, since it's a lot trickier to get the second case right" as the Webkit code comments say).
There are various other areas in which Webkit is behind Gecko in terms of standards support, and vice versa.
They seem to have different future development priorities (e.g.
in terms of things like SMIL vs CSS Animations).It's also not clear which is developing faster, and that aspect is subject to rapid change.
I think at this point there are more full-time engineers employed to work on Webkit than on the equivalent parts of Gecko.
That may or may not continue to be the case.Another interesting question, of course, is IE.
IE9 has a bigger development team than either Webkit or Gecko, from what I can tell, and they're rapidly working on closing the existing gaps.
IE's support for CSS2.1 is better than either Webkit's \_or\_ Gecko's in my testing (easier to do in some ways because the spec has kept changing so in some cases Webkit/Gecko implement earlier versions).
Of course IE has a lot of catching up to do in other areas.It'll be an interesting next few years all around.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628126</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing to do with the OS X version</title>
	<author>Joe Jay Bee</author>
	<datestamp>1262440860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I dropped Safari like a hot rock as soon as Chrome came out for Mac. Safari is buggy, slow, crashes all the time and is inflexible enough that it <i>really</i> gets on my tits. I'm glad to see the back of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I dropped Safari like a hot rock as soon as Chrome came out for Mac .
Safari is buggy , slow , crashes all the time and is inflexible enough that it really gets on my tits .
I 'm glad to see the back of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dropped Safari like a hot rock as soon as Chrome came out for Mac.
Safari is buggy, slow, crashes all the time and is inflexible enough that it really gets on my tits.
I'm glad to see the back of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30630818</id>
	<title>Re:Worthless</title>
	<author>Pascal Sartoretti</author>
	<datestamp>1262519640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>These kinds of browser stats are how we tracked the rise-and-fall of Netscape, the rise and stagnation of IE, and the rise of Firefox</p></div><p>If you really want to track this, you would rather use absolute numbers instead of percentages. Losing market share is not so tragic as long as long as you don't lose actual users.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>These kinds of browser stats are how we tracked the rise-and-fall of Netscape , the rise and stagnation of IE , and the rise of FirefoxIf you really want to track this , you would rather use absolute numbers instead of percentages .
Losing market share is not so tragic as long as long as you do n't lose actual users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These kinds of browser stats are how we tracked the rise-and-fall of Netscape, the rise and stagnation of IE, and the rise of FirefoxIf you really want to track this, you would rather use absolute numbers instead of percentages.
Losing market share is not so tragic as long as long as you don't lose actual users.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625598</id>
	<title>Re:Jumping ship from IE?</title>
	<author>idiotnot</author>
	<datestamp>1262423820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.</i></p><p>I use IE sometimes;  there's stuff I try to use that doesn't work in FF or Chrome, especially at work, where government sites still don't work well with either (CAC-enabled DoD sites, especially).</p><p><i>I'd be willing to bet its almost entirely loss of Firefox users (like myself), as Firefox has become a bloated, buggy, slow pile of crap that would make IE6 proud.</i></p><p>I've switched to Chrome most of the time on my Windows box at work, and another here at home.  Am currently using FF on this box, because I don't use it all that much.  On my macs, I use Safari.</p><p>But the bigger sisue is that WebKit/KHTML is now a better core than Gecko, and will probably surpass Gecko-based browsers at some point in the not-too-distant future.  This is especially true when you consider that a large portion of the mobile browser market is now WebKit-based (Safari on iPhone, Chrome on Android), and the Gecko/FF port to Win32 was damn near unusable when I used it last (this past summer, before I bought my iPhone).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.I use IE sometimes ; there 's stuff I try to use that does n't work in FF or Chrome , especially at work , where government sites still do n't work well with either ( CAC-enabled DoD sites , especially ) .I 'd be willing to bet its almost entirely loss of Firefox users ( like myself ) , as Firefox has become a bloated , buggy , slow pile of crap that would make IE6 proud.I 've switched to Chrome most of the time on my Windows box at work , and another here at home .
Am currently using FF on this box , because I do n't use it all that much .
On my macs , I use Safari.But the bigger sisue is that WebKit/KHTML is now a better core than Gecko , and will probably surpass Gecko-based browsers at some point in the not-too-distant future .
This is especially true when you consider that a large portion of the mobile browser market is now WebKit-based ( Safari on iPhone , Chrome on Android ) , and the Gecko/FF port to Win32 was damn near unusable when I used it last ( this past summer , before I bought my iPhone ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure I know anyone who uses IE who even knows that Chrome exists.I use IE sometimes;  there's stuff I try to use that doesn't work in FF or Chrome, especially at work, where government sites still don't work well with either (CAC-enabled DoD sites, especially).I'd be willing to bet its almost entirely loss of Firefox users (like myself), as Firefox has become a bloated, buggy, slow pile of crap that would make IE6 proud.I've switched to Chrome most of the time on my Windows box at work, and another here at home.
Am currently using FF on this box, because I don't use it all that much.
On my macs, I use Safari.But the bigger sisue is that WebKit/KHTML is now a better core than Gecko, and will probably surpass Gecko-based browsers at some point in the not-too-distant future.
This is especially true when you consider that a large portion of the mobile browser market is now WebKit-based (Safari on iPhone, Chrome on Android), and the Gecko/FF port to Win32 was damn near unusable when I used it last (this past summer, before I bought my iPhone).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627338</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing to do with the OS X version</title>
	<author>FictionPimp</author>
	<datestamp>1262434920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a mac user. I switched from safari to chrome. My wife switched from ff to chrome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a mac user .
I switched from safari to chrome .
My wife switched from ff to chrome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a mac user.
I switched from safari to chrome.
My wife switched from ff to chrome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626238</id>
	<title>As you can see, Firefox RULES in Antarctica!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262427960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And if you check out this link, you will see Firefox' near <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-an-monthly-200812-201001" title="statcounter.com" rel="nofollow">absolute dominance in Antarctica.</a> [statcounter.com]  Go Firefox go!  I actually use Firefox, just thought this graph was pretty funny.  At best it may reveal the browser preferences of the remote research scientific community.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if you check out this link , you will see Firefox ' near absolute dominance in Antarctica .
[ statcounter.com ] Go Firefox go !
I actually use Firefox , just thought this graph was pretty funny .
At best it may reveal the browser preferences of the remote research scientific community .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if you check out this link, you will see Firefox' near absolute dominance in Antarctica.
[statcounter.com]  Go Firefox go!
I actually use Firefox, just thought this graph was pretty funny.
At best it may reveal the browser preferences of the remote research scientific community.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625146</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30631496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628998
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629040
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30630634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627376
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30632660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628024
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626142
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627294
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625246
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30635352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30638318
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30632514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30630818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_02_1838251_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30631640
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627294
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628512
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625680
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626142
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625648
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30631640
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30630818
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30638318
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30632514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629154
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625578
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625356
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625464
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626620
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625394
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30631496
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626208
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625694
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30630634
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625598
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628492
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626670
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30626712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628756
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30627236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30629170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30635352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625328
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30632660
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_02_1838251.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30625944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_02_1838251.30628024
</commentlist>
</conversation>
